Gerard A. Nieters

MRL's whole focus is on saving innocent human lives at every stage of development and in every condition, that is, from the moment of conception until natural death. We are consistent in our mission and in our method. We take a position on legislation when it threatens innocent human lives. We inform the legislators of that position and we report their vote. Some politicians don't like that.

There are several reasons for MRL's nonsupport of the personhood amendment. Mainly, Missouri already has in statute the language "Life begins at conception." Unfortunately, state law does not trump a U.S. Supreme Court opinion declaring a right to an abortion. A personhood amendment to the Missouri Constitution would not stop a single abortion. It will not override the Roe v. Wade abortion decision. Only a personhood amendment to the U.S. Constitution will override Roe v. Wade.

MRL will not waste its limited resources on a worthless effort. Why don't the Personhood Missouri folks join with the personhood groups in other states to push a personhood USA?

Regarding the embryonic stem cell/cloning fight, MRL fought Amendment 2, the clone and kill amendment, in 2006, with all its might. While Amendment 2 passed by the narrowest of margins, it certainly was not because of any actions of MRL. The amendment passed in spite of MRL's actions. Thus, I do not know what Kiser is suggesting here with his reference to the embryonic stem cell debacle.

Kiser's call for an end to playing politics would be better directed at those legislators who claim to be pro-life but fail to vote that way.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Missouri Right to Life: Effort would waste resources

O'Fallon This is in response to Pastor Mark Kiser's letter complaining about Missouri Right to Life ('Let's end pro-life group's politics,' Oct. 28).